Professional Researcher
Asexual Identity Development
Despite there being a significant increase in the quantity of literature regarding asexuality in recent years, research examining asexual identity development is nonetheless sparse. The research that has been conducted on this topic has primarily sought to address the following questions: What factors influence the development of an asexual identity? What processes and experiences are involved in this development? In this field of inquiry, scholars have identified several salient features of identity formation in asexual individuals as well as multiple theories of asexual identity development. This review will discuss these findings in detail, beginning with a brief introduction to the concept of asexuality, followed by an analysis of the various factors implicated in asexual identity development, and concluded with an overview of three theoretical models of asexual identity development.
Asexual Identity: What is Asexuality?
Demographic studies estimate that 1% or more of the population meet criteria for asexuality (Bogaert, 2004). Though there is no single agreed-upon definition for asexuality, scholars frequently cite a lack of sexual attraction, interest, or desire (Scherrer, 2008). Generally, asexuality is considered a diverse and inclusive identity with the term “asexual” representing a multitude of different identifications (Robbins et al., 2015). Among many other beliefs and practices, asexuality includes individuals who desire romantic but not sexual relationships, individuals who feel sexual attraction but do not wish to have sex, individuals that are sex-repulsed, individuals who are not interested in sex, individuals who are not interested in romance, and individuals that experience sexual attraction dependent on a set of particular circumstances (Robbins et al., 2015). Empirical studies on asexuality have observed the use of a variety of labels to describe these variations within the asexual community, such as demisexual, demiromantic, aromantic, biromantic, heteroromantic, homoromantic, and Gray-A (Jay, 2008b, as cited in Robbins et al., 2015). Research has also established that many asexual people view asexuality as a defining characteristic of their identity and embrace an asexual identity (Robbins et al., 2015; Scherrer, 2008).
The Role of The Internet: AVEN and Other Asexual Internet Communities
The internet has served a vital function in legitimizing asexual identities, bringing asexual individuals together, and helping them discover and affirm their identity (Foster et al., 2019; Robbins et al., 2015; Scherrer, 2008). The Asexuality Visibility and Education Network (better known as AVEN) is an online asexual community that has served a unique role in these developments by assisting asexual people who are questioning their identity, validating their experiences, and providing them with social support (Robbins et al., 2015). For asexual individuals who are concerned about their low level of sexual desire, discovering asexual communities like AVEN was experienced as relieving, freeing, and even comforting (Foster et al., 2019; Robbins et al., 2015). A participant in Foster et al.’s (2019) study “described the Internet as the primary way that helped her better understand herself as asexual through facilitating connection to asexual communities and providing information about the ‘different types of asexuality’” (p. 134). Participants in Robbin et al.’s (2015) study found that the internet, particularly AVEN, is an extremely valuable tool in coming out as asexual. Scherrer (2008) argued that AVEN has also enabled asexual individuals to discuss their experiences by creating a lexicon to describe asexuality and providing a location for asexual individuals to gather. Overall, scholars contend that “[t]he internet has become the principle venue through which the asexual identity is socially constructed and validated, and its myriad social networks allow asexual individuals to connect with other members of the community” (Robbins et al., 2015, p. 758).
Sex Normativity: Assumptions of Sexuality
Asexual experiences challenge the notion that sexual desire is an inherent part of the human experience (Foster et al., 2019). This concept is understood as sex normativity, the assumption that sexual desire and sexual experiences are essential for positive social and personal development (Foster et al., 2019). Existing in a hyper-sexual and sex-normative society as asexual can be especially challenging (Robbins et al., 2015). With sex-normative conventions painting asexual individuals as deviant from the norm, asexual people may face additional obstacles in establishing their identity (Foster et al., 2019). Ultimately, sex normativity lends itself to an environment that is experienced by asexual individuals as stigmatizing and sometimes discriminatory (Foster et al., 2019).
Asexual Stigma
In fact, much of the research conducted on asexuality has demonstrated that asexual individuals are subject to stigma and/or prejudice (Foster et al., 2019; Robbins et al., 2015; Scherrer, 2008). As a potential reason for this phenomenon, it has been proposed that “[a]s a relatively new sexual identity, asexuality still lacks legitimization and acceptance from family members, community members and medical institutions” (Prause & Graham, 2007 as cited in Scherrer, 2008, p. 629). Participants in Foster et al.’s (2019) study felt this lack of acceptance as social rejection, and “the stigmatizing assumption that something is ‘wrong’ with them (e.g., mental illness, childhood trauma)” (p. 133). This is in line with Scherrer’s (2008) argument that rather than being treated as a legitimate identity, asexuality is often treated as a physical or psychological illness. In Robbin et al.’s (2015) study, many asexual individuals expressed fear of disclosing their asexual identity. They cited concerns about social stigma, changing relationships, and worries that they would be rejected and misjudged by others (Robbins et al., 2015). This is consistent with claims by Foster et al.’s (2019) participants that assumptions of sexuality are enabled and enforced by the social norms associated with one’s demographic categories, and how these norms can represent asexual people as atypical and deviant.
These experiences of stigma are especially prevalent for asexual women of color (Foster et al., 2019). Asexual women of color (AWOC) in Foster et al.’s study reported feeling rejected, objectified, sexualized, harassed, othered, and stereotyped as a result of their religious, ethnic, and asexual identities. However, there is very minimal research devoted to examining the experiences of AWOC, so many of these issues have been largely overlooked in research on asexuality identity development.
Theories of Asexual Identity Development
With this information in mind, scholars have created some theoretical frameworks to describe the factors that drive asexual identity development and the stages this process may follow. Some scholars assert that the social and psychological process of developing an asexual identity is similar to that of other minority sexual groups (Scherrer, 2008). Other scholars have argued that asexual development differs qualitatively from homosexual development, suggesting that because asexuality is lesser-known in popular culture, asexual people often pathologize their lack of sexual desire and subsequently go through a process of discovering asexuality and asexual terminology (Robbins et al., 2015). Many researchers have highlighted the importance that the internet plays in developing an asexual identity (Foster et al., 2019; Robbins et al., 2015; Scherrer, 2008). In Foster et al.’s (2019) study, the internet helped participants “bec[o]me more secure and internaliz[e] asexuality as a positive attribute within an integrated self-concept” (p. 134). Social and interpersonal information have also appeared as important factors in identity development (Robbins et al., 2015). Robbins et al. (2015) found that participating in a community may even be essential in accepting an asexual identity, as it allows for exploration and helps in developing a positive self-image.
Robbins, Low, and Query’s Theoretical Model of Asexual Identity Development
Based on this information, Robbins et al. (2015) proposed six stages of asexual identity development. The first stage is identity confusion, wherein individuals begin to have a clear sense that they are different from others and question why. If an adolescent at this stage is situated within an environment that is largely unaware of asexuality, they may pathologize their absence of sexual desire. Discovery of terminology is the second stage, during which the individual finds the correct language to describe their asexual identity. The third stage, exploration and education, involves self-education about asexuality through a community (most commonly asexual internet groups such as AVEN). This process occurs when individuals interact online with asexual communities, exploring how strongly they identify with asexuality. This leads to the fourth stage—identity acceptance and salience negotiation. Within this stage, the individual rejects their earlier pathologization of their asexuality and begins to see asexuality as a legitimate identity. Furthermore, they begin adapting and modifying their definition of asexuality to better reflect their experiences and attitudes. Following this is stage five: coming out as asexual. According to Robbins et al., coming out has both psychological and practical functions as well as being an important identity formation process for sexual minorities. In particular, Robbins et al. argued that coming out may be a means of communicating how salient asexuality is to one’s identity, and an indication that one has committed to asexuality as part of their lifestyle. Consistent with this idea, Robbin et al.’s participants who had come out as asexual actually viewed their asexuality as more central to their identity than those who had not come out. The final stage of Robbin et al.’s model is identity integration—a period in which the individual is proud and accepting of their asexual identity, “regardless of their choice to come out” (p. 759). This model provides a sequential theory of asexual identity development, hypothesizing that certain experiences and interactions (both internal and external) mediate an individuals progression from one stage of identity development to the next.
Other Models of Asexual Development
Several other scholars have proposed similar theories of asexual identity development, the most notable being those advanced by Scott, McDonnell, and Dawson (2016) and Foster and colleagues (2019). Scott et al.’s (2016) theory argued that “the first trajectory stage of becoming asexual involves a period of self-questioning, discovery and making sense of the term ‘asexual’”, which is followed by using the term asexual to describe oneself, engaging with the asexual community and other asexual people, coming out as asexual, and consolidating one’s asexual identity (p. 8). They contend that successful completion of this process depends on one’s interactions with significant others, particularly if valued others are receptive to one’s asexual identity (Scott et al., 2016). Foster et al. (2019) determined that for their participants, asexual identity development occurred gradually, beginning in adolescence when they started to see themselves as being inherently different from their peers and attempted to understand these differences. This led them to better recognize their sexuality and kickstarted the process of forming and adapting their own personal definitions of asexuality. Lastly, most participants in Foster et al.'s study reached a stage of self-acceptance and an integrated asexual identity. This is consistent with the models proposed by Robbins et al. (2015) and Scott et al. (2016).
Conclusion
Research has revealed several prominent factors and processes implicated in asexual identity development. In particular, these studies emphasize the unique contributions of the internet and online asexual communities, sex normativity, and coming out as asexual in developing an asexual identity. Using these findings, multiple models and theories of asexual identity development have been proposed to qualitatively describe the experiences and phenomena associated with discovering, exploring, claiming, and accepting an asexual identity. As most of these models are based on data from white cisgender females, further inquiry into this topic is a worthwhile pursuit. Future research in this field should address the unique experiences of groups that have been historically underrepresented in research on asexuality, including asexual people of color, asexual men, transgender asexuals, religious asexuals, and asexual immigrants.
References
Bogaert, A. F. (2004). Asexuality: Prevalence and associated factors in a national probability sample. Journal of Sex Research, 41(3), 279-287. http://dx.doi.org.oca.ucsc.edu/10.1080/00224490409552235
Foster, A. B., Eklund, A., Brewster, M. E., Walker, A. D., & Candon, E. (2019). Personal agency disavowed: Identity construction in asexual women of color. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 6(2), 127-137. http://dx.doi.org.oca.ucsc.edu/10.1037/sgd0000310
Robbins, N. K., Low, K. G., & Query, A. N. (2016). A qualitative exploration of the “coming out” process for asexual individuals. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45(3), 751-760. http://dx.doi.org.oca.ucsc.edu/10.1007/s10508-015-0561-x
Scherrer K. S. (2008). Coming to an Asexual Identity: Negotiating Identity, Negotiating Desire. Sexualities, 11(5), 621–641. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460708094269
Scott, S., McDonnell, L., & Dawson, M. (2016). Stories of non‐becoming: Non‐issues, non‐events and non‐identities in asexual lives. Symbolic Interaction, 39(2), 268-286. http://dx.doi.org.oca.ucsc.edu/10.1002/symb.215